skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hedge funds don't use Robinhood, so this won't affect their ability to buy or sell. The price plummeted today because of Robinhood and other small brokerages restricting trading the day before lots of shares would have to be purchased to cover in the money options.

So, many retail users of Robinhood and other brokerages couldn't buy, could only sell, while hedge funds and other institutions could continue to do what they want.

The rules should be the same for everyone, all of the time. If Jane StockPicker can't buy a security, then nobody else should be able to. I'm honestly furious about this. I made a small amount of money on GME and cashed out a couple days ago - the shorts were in a bad spot, too bad - so seeing how other retail investors are being screwed over here makes me feel sick.

Oh, and Melvin Capital (one of the short sellers who has been most screwed by taking a bad position) was bailed out by Citadel, and guess who one of Robinhood's investors is?

I'm not exaggerating when I say that there needs to be a congressional hearing and SEC investigation. You can say what you want about retail traders exchanging ideas on WSB, a public forum, but closing down trading for retail investors cost them a lot of money early and why were hedge funds able to short a stock so heavily?

Pending investigation, this is a serious problem and I think there is likely to be ongoing corruption here.
> they might vote that your nefarious chat should be opened up

You are implicitly assuming that this is the only way that the chats can be decrypted. This is only true until the keys are compromised. And the keys will be compromised, because:

1. The keys are worth a lot to the right people.

2. The parties which have the keys have no real incentive to secure the keys well.

3. There is no way for an party with a key to become aware that the key has been compromised.

1, 2, and 3 will combine into a state of the world in which the keys are always compromised.
This is satire!
I know a few people who have bought Tesla’s. They fretted about panel gaps while they waited for delivery. Each one found small issues here or there with their car. A panel misalignment, a loose plug, a paint chip. But none have talked about those problems since. They just talk about how much they like driving it.
Jamie Zawinski's take on the matter: https://www.jwz.org/blog/2018/06/lol-github/
A GM employee was heard asking ’What’s an OTA update’
If you can't get something as simple as panel gaps right, why would I trust you to get the brakes right?
IIUC the trick with GameStop is that some big traders are shorting it, and eventually they will have to buy it at whatever price it is. But ... who is shorting Dogecoin?

Disclaimer 1: I didn't invest in neither. I'm here just for the popcorn.

Disclaimer 2: This is not financial advice.

Disclaimer 3: Never invest more than you can afford to lose.
This move by RH is changing the rules of the game
I see a login/register box with no further information. Is the app URL private maybe?
A few punters losing money on GameStop stock (and an awful lot of them will lose), and possibly some hedgies taking a minor trim, is hardly going to bring down our system of economics.

Bear in mind all but a few of these small investors haven't made a single penny. They only make money when they actually sell, and as soon as a significant number of them do sell the price will fall and the money the others think they have made will vanish. And then some.

So a few hedgies might lose a few bucks, but all the WSB people piling in are not a cuddly gang of friends, and not all on the same side and the savvy among them surely know that. The smart ones will sell and leave the rest holding the can. It's the poor saps piling in at $300+ who genuinely think they are sticking it to the man that I worry about.

The people who have actually made money so far are the ones who already had stock and have ben selling on the way up, because the stock being bought must have come from somewhere, not the ones who have gone long now and will end up long when it collapses again. It's amazing how many journalists and commentators get this so badly wrong.
The body is not actually stainless steel. This is common misconception. Its actually a totally normal unibody construction, they just put stainless steel panels on top just like other cars put painted panels on top.

And even if it was, why 'would it not make it far'? Cars are made out of steel, stainless steal worse then other types of steel.

The first car that is actually structurally stainless steel will by the Cybertruck as far as I know.
Front running is illegal indeed. But it would be possible to use Robinhood's order flow data to detect momentum and decide to hold a position from that. Small difference but the effect is the same
I guess the point is... say you use a microchip connected to a sensor to determine when to switch off a gas nozzle. It would work, of course, but if the sensor fails, or there's a bug in the firmware, or if power fails... gas spills everywhere. Whereas if you couple the trigger to a physical phenomenon that doesn't need electricity to work, now there's only one thing that can fail, and that's the part converting the physical phenomenon to a mechanical action.

I love computers as much as anyone on this site, but I like mechanical things too. I much prefer mechanical locks to digital ones. Mechanical locks are extremely reliable and well made ones work for centuries. Whereas I wouldn't trust a modern fingerprint padlock at all - what if the sensor fails? What if the batteries run out? What if moisture gets inside and corrodes the circuit board? One of the main jobs of a lock is to open when I need it to, and I just don't trust battery powered locks to do that.
There's a lot of victimhood mentality going on right now. Everything is being blamed on Wall Street and market makers 'ripping off the little guys'. I believe you 100% but sadly you're not going to get through to them.
> No browser I ever used offers a good solution to not only store bookmarks but also being good at finding them again.

And tabs solve this problem how? In most browsers they aren’t even searchable.

The only advantage over a folder of bookmarks is that you can close one with a shortcuts, whereas bookmarks require several clicks.
Open source governance seems to be a key question here; in other words, how does a corporation communicate with their community of customers and users, and how are decisions about the software made as a result of those discussions?
Yes. The only thing I'd suggest is to call for volunteers from "sane" subreddits that seem to have a good moderation policy and reasonable moderators.

The problem there is that the above people are already likely quite busy, and don't want to take on an additional (unpaid) burden by trying to clean up a sub they don't really care about.
> The truly scary part is this is not only working, but is a repeatable strategy that will work over and over. The next internet board to lead after wsb will be just as successful at bankrupting casino firms using their own casino tactics.

Uh, should I be feeling sorry for the hedge funds? I can't say I find their plight particularly sympathetic.
Look at the language of SEC (and other regulators outside of technical fields like pharma).

There are very occasional "landmark" regulations, often legislated, that are explicit. EG Sarbanes-Oxley.

Day-2-day, the SEC works mostly by signalling. They might make a policy declaration, or send letters to CEOs. They'll note things in periodic firm reviews. Publicly raise an eyebrow. Take action against or investigate one firm and publish findings. Rarely are specifically worded edicts issued.

Regulating bodies are designed to work largely through pressure instead of (ironically) through regulations. This is by design. Regulators are usually created in response to firms having won the loophole cat and mouse games, and the prohibitive complexity of actual regulations. If government wanted rules, they can just legislate directly instead of delegating to a regulator.

"Compliance" is often about staying away from trouble by playing a sort of guessing game. It doesn't mean that it's "hands off."
This is not artificially influencing the stock price. Buying a stock believing it will increase in value is basically the point of the stock market. Believing it will increase in value because it's been over-shorted is a legitimate reason to ascribe value to it.

> The US Securities Exchange Act defines market manipulation as "transactions which create an artificial price or maintain an artificial price for a tradable security".

It is my opinion that this demand is not artificial, it is genuine, although caused by factors other than the inherent value of the stock itself.

If this is considered to be 'creating an artificial price', I don't see how a position where 140% of the shares of a company are shorted could not be, meaning significantly wider implications than just a single subreddit.
If you look at it that way, then what Facebook was advocating for starts to look noble. They wanted ultimate transparency so that if anyone said anything stupid, it would get instantly knocked down, preventing the spread of misinformation, but obviously they failed really badly.
And that time, the rules were also changed to protect the big guys. How convenient. The stock market is a farce.
Talking about tabs can only remind me of how bad I am (was??) at hoarding them [0]. Years and years worth. All the best organization systems in the world can't save you from clicking more and more. It was at least a little terrifying whenever I close Firefox and it says I'm closing 5 windows with 768 tabs (which it will restore, but I worry)...

[0] https://www.vice.com/en/article/88adya/death-by-1000-tabs-co...
WeRe DoInG iT tO PrOtEcT YoU
Exactly. Hedge funds, hedge.
I agree, with how much regulation is there is in every other aspect of the markets, I am surprised there is not more explicit process around just shutting off trades they don't like.
Thinking of Wall Street as a homogeneous entity is a big mistake.

Lots of finance firms are loving this (Citadel for instance used this as an opportunity to get in on a distressed asset, Melvin, cheaply). This Korean fund made a billion dollars on a 12 million dollar investment https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/l...

Even Melvin didn’t take an existential beating. They are likely going to end their fund date positive which is good for the endowments they manage especially if they got there via a more diversified position than other options.
>> By the time someone sends a pull request they already put a significant amount of effort into their message and thus will rightfully get angry when their efforts are being rejected.

I'd prefer if they open an issue - or use an existing one - as a forum to discuss what they'll be doing in a PR. That way we can either reject an idea prior to someone putting in the effort, or talk about implementation so the resulting PR is more likely to be accepted.

Drive by PRs are fine if they're simple, but the ones of higher impact need more consideration.

Even more than PRs, I have mixed feelings about feature requests. Many of them are legit things that would make the software better, but with limited resources they're likely to sit for years. Is it better to let them pile up or close them? Maybe a new tag - Deferred.
I am. Our county clinics provide a small list of services - mostly new family stuff like prenatal and inoculations.
I read your comment and thought it was a little over the top. Then as I was reading the article I saw the embedded tweet without any context and it was just so bizarre I had to see why on earth it was even featured. A search for “toothpaste” and, sure enough:

> Telegram's MTProto protocol isn't obviously broken in a practical way, concedes Matt Green, a cryptographer at Johns Hopkins University who has consulted for Facebook on encrypted messaging systems. But it's uniquely "weird," he says, in a way that suggests its inventors don't understand tried-and-true cryptography practices and raises his suspicions that it may yet have undiscovered vulnerabilities. "It's like if everyone else in the world has agreed that we're going to use drywall to do the walls in a house, and then you've got somebody who's using toothpaste," says Green. "Even if the toothpaste works and makes a nice wall, that's weird. How do you know they're not doing other weird, nonstandard things when they put the electrical wiring into the house? And that's what scares me."

I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt (maybe this guy is just terrible at analogies?) so I’m not sure I’d say facebook definitely seeded the article but this is just such a wacky, nonsensical thing for someone to say I don’t really know what on earth to make of it.
Never trained for any sort of a QA but can completely relate to your mindset. I am paranoid and love to add tests. They saved the bottom of my team (and sometimes the company, in my smaller customers at least) many, many times.

And it's still under-appreciated as a skill to this day even if I got handshakes and many "good job!"-s in chats.
Yeah, in Firefox I've been really happy with Tree-Style Tabs on the right hand side.
Where can I go to learn how to do this? It's an awesome concept. Are there any resources you can point me to?
And lets be honest, the overlap between retail investors trying to buy meme stocks and people who regarded Parler as their true voice isn't going to be that huge (and the relationship between AWS and Robinhood's compliance teams negligible). Anyone sufficiently motivated to see strong connections between the actions of AWS booting Parler and Robinhood restricting trades is going to be so accustomed to seeing everything through a fact-lite 'us vs the man' lens that it barely matters what corporations actually do. And those tempted by actual violence have had other causes to attach themselves to over the last 12 months anyway.

Also this isn't people 'asserting themselves financially', this is people mug punting on a stock that wealthier and more financially savvy people who got in early are happy to unload their stock to. There will end up being people quite relieved they didn't get to execute their plan to put their life savings into peak-price Gamestop.
It's not GM, but my 2019 Toyota does OTA updates.
PR is not always about adding code.
Have you visited recently? It’s definitely about sending a message, they want to bankrupt the short holders.
I’m not sure what you think REST is suboptimal for here, the function you described maps trivially to it.

GET /tasks?whatever=filters

I agree the part that wires up the HTTP behavior should be minimal and mostly uninvolved with your application logic. (I’m actually working on such a beast!).
I learned C# in under a day by using ReSharper and reading a few articles about C# idioms and memory management.

If you know a variety of languages already and your IDE is hinting, linting, and suggesting idioms, you can be productive super quickly.

(I've now been writing C# for years and can confirm that my understanding of the language has not changed dramatically since my first week with it.)
So, closing the loop back to the original analogy, you shouldn't be able to sublet an apartment with an occupancy rate of 4, out to 8 people.
Top open source MLOps (Machine Learning Operations) tools
How to Be Clear
It doesn’t work the same because the alt-right is just vile. Given that, conflating wsb with the alt-right is ridiculous.
I just checked my TD Ameritrade account. I couldn't call up any information on GME.
1) I'm not sure the magnitude of change is relevant to the analogy -- it doesn't alter the mechanics as much etc.

2) You can view renting as a sale -- the renter buying the utility of the space in exchange for a series of cash flows (but not paying for the economic upside/downside). Financial markets have the ability to separate components of assets (ex. voting vs non-voting shares) and value them; there's no reason to not do the same here.

In that structure a sublet is simply a rent on a rent.
I was able to find a ghost town near my hometown to give Facebook. According to Facebook, a few hundred people came from there. If true they’d all be over 90.
Its nice that more people are coming to this realization, though I'll admit that it's a bit funny that this, of all events, is what's making people realize that extreme wealth disparity is a problem.

The existence of billionaires isn't even good for the free market, let alone free society. In order for a market to be rational, the threat of losing money has to actually mean something, which it doesn't for the ultra-rich.
What about this specific financial event did someone “do wrong”?
I have worked in one and no they don't. Most restaurants barely break even by the end of the month once you factor in all costs (like employees, rent...), which I did in the example of fastmail.
using the word "optics" is exactly why people are saying it's overvalued.
Can the subletting of apartments lead to a Volkswagen Squeeze? (https://moxreports.com/vw-infinity-squeeze/)

The GME heavily-shorted position specifically has directly led to significant manipulation on the parts of investment firms that are now endangered by the very positions they created. If the end game of the stock market is an unregulated free-for-all, then it can't be manipulated by definition and there's going to be short cycles of calm punctuated by terrifying chaos like 2008 and today; if people want to avoid that chaos, then they have to accept the regulation of chaos-causing behavior.
> Robinhood doesn't like us? We'll start out own.

Then payment processors ban you. Then you start your own visa. Let's start our own visa. Banks ban you. Let's start our own bank. Your hosting service bans you. Host your own. Your ISP bans you. Start your own ISP. Other ISPs don't peer with you. Start your own internet. Then the feds shut down your bank.

The answer to censorship is not "start your own".
The value proposition is not that people want to buy it now. It is that they build something that people WILL want to buy.

There are a lot of gas car manufacturers who make something that lots want to buy, but in 5 years people won't want those products. And it is unclear whether they will successfully make the transition to what is coming. (Based on the history of disruptive innovation, they mostly won't. No matter the public pronouncements to the contrary.)
> GME will help pull down our current fake system, and help the middle and lower classes receive fair compensation from the system.

errr.... no? It won't. At all. How?

What will happen is that a few hedge funds will lose a bit, a few hedge funds will make a bit, lots of retail investors will lose a bit (maybe more than they can stomach, individually), and a few retail investors will make a lot.

For the middle and lower classes to receive fair compensation from the system, you need political action (and definitely not the "more tax cuts for the super rich" Trump type).
> Anyone can buy a domain and redirect it anywhere. This is an extremely embarrassing comment for the level of discussion I expected from HN.

Exactly. Has everyone forgotten whitehouse.com? In the 90s it was a porn site.
At least the hammers I see (on European trains and buses) have a sharp, conical tip. There are usually instructions to hit the window close to the corner.

See the picture on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_hammer

(The wording in the Wikipedia article is not clear. Do American trains really not have these?)
Peer-to-peer communication with sparsely decentralized data storage is the answer.
> There is literally, and has been for a long time, a website that tells you the short interest in a stock. It's sole purpose is to help people find short squeezes. That's why you have stats like "days to cover."

Again, I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, and this is not a legal interpretation or legal advice; just my personal opinion.

Motivation and intent are the main factors in determining manipulation. So there are two cases:

1. A trader buys stock, seeking to profit, because they believe that a short squeeze may be incoming soon.

2. A trader buys stock, seeking to profit, because they intend to drive the stock price up, thereby causing a short squeeze.

(1) is legal (in my understanding; see the disclaimers above). (2) is not. They differ in their intents. The first one is "legitimate" demand, the second is "artificial."

Now, it's difficult to prove intent in court. And clearly, many people in WSB legitimately are buying the stock because of (1). But there are some who are doing (2). They have plausible deniability, though, and that's why it's unlikely that anyone in WSB will be successfully prosecuted without more concrete evidence.
"The solution to too many tabs is here – MORE TABS!"
...Exactly. This is by design. It's what regulators are designed to do. Medical/pharma is an exception. Usually regulators are designed to wield pressure. For long term goals, they usually steer towards more explicit "industry standards" that they can back... but they rarely author them.

For shorter term and more operational issues, pressure is the main toolkit.
It's how it is today and also how it was when the framers wrote the constitution. Benjamin Rush suggested a particular printer for Thomas Paine to work with to print Common Sense, because Rush knew not every printer would want to print it based on its content.
> It will harm everyone, but at least this Century will be less focused on speculation and more on actual earnings.

Yeah I'm not sure GME is exemplifying a new regime of market focus on actual earnings instead of speculation...
Being able to turn off pull requests would help for cases like this.

Though the default GitHub setup also makes contributions unnecessarily difficult to manage. For example, a project can tell if it has been forked but otherwise has no idea what the forker is currently doing! Is the forker working on a possible future contribution (and worse, could that work be duplicating something that is already in progress elsewhere?). There are also plenty of forks that seem to never evolve, not even taking the minimal effort of pulling recent upstream changes.

The contribution mechanism could be broken up into different phases, something like:

0. Visitor forks project but this should be invisible, i.e. it is not “your repository” for all to see, since you haven’t actually contributed anything to it yet.

1. Visitor clicks button stating “intention to contribute” that notifies upstream project immediately. This includes information such as the nature of the proposed change.

2. The project maintainer then has the opportunity to communicate immediately, e.g. “sure!” or “please don’t do this, $SOMEONE_ELSE is already doing it” or “I don’t think that is a good idea” or whatever. Then the project can put this into a visible state on the GitHub page so that everyone knows about this in-progress work.

3. Eventually the work is done, and is converted to a Pull Request as opposed to just appearing out of the blue.

4. Once accepted, the repository is publicly listed on your profile since you have made an actual contribution to it.
I wish, but it isn't. There was a request a few years ago for tree style tabs to be implemented in Vivaldi, but I think the dev didn't like the conflict with their own tab layout implementation.

Seems to me there's a subset of power users on Firefox just waiting for any other browser to implement tree style tabs.
I said this somewhere else, but you should think of the rent as ownership of the utility of the space for a fixed tenor. The only reason you can't easily trade it is most contracts restrict that, but removing that friction, it really isn't too different.
>government made some of it back

Government or the people working for the gorvernment?
How to Minimize EMI and Switching Loss When Using Sic MOSFETs